Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00172
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Shephard v. Socail Sercuity Mangers et al
as 8:2016cv01153
Plaintiff:
Terrence Varnell Shephard, II
Defendant:
Socail Sercuity Mangers, Molly and Love
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Varnell v. Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC
as 5:2015cv00660
Plaintiff:
James E. Varnell
Defendant:
Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Moon et al v. Pfizer Inc
as 2:2014cv03735
Plaintiff:
Kathy A Moon and Varnell A Moon
Defendant:
Pfizer Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Pittman v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv21075
Plaintiff:
Varnell Pittman
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Varnell et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2013cv25882
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Varnell and Johnny Varnell
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Varnell et al v. Turner et al
as 1:2013cv00741
Plaintiff:
Carla Varnell
Defendant:
Grant Stewart, David Turner and James F. Amos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Humphrey v. Coloplast Corp.
as 2:2013cv14840
Plaintiff:
Varnelle Humphrey
Defendant:
Coloplast Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Khadirah El-Bey v. City of Raleigh Police Dept
as 11-2026
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KHADIRAH MA'AT T. EL-BEY and ASARU ALIM N.T. EL-BEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF RALEIGH POLICE DEPARTMENT, J. S. VARNELL, DAVID SHELTON and others
El-Bey et al v. City of Raleigh Police Department et al
as 5:2011cv00275
Plaintiff:
Khadirah Ma'at T. El-Bey and Asaru Alim N.T. El-Bey
Defendant:
City of Raleigh Police Department, J.S. Varnell, David Shelton and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
